Dear Cory Jensen

You should include all contributed researchers in your research paper. this is a kind of ethics.

Hi Cory Jensen, this sounds rather unusual. During my 40 years of research I never heard about such a case. Normally every supervisor should have an interest to publish the results obtained by a co-worker. I also see it as my responsibility as supervisor to publish as many results from M.Sc. or Ph.D. theses within a reasonable time in order to promote the careers of my co-workers. In this case, I feel that is more a question of a disturbed relationship between student and mentor than an ethical one.

Frank T. Edelmann , disturbed is an interesting assessment, what does that mean or translate to in terms of a mentee-mentor relationship? It is understood that the student is required to publish and that the mentor knows this to be true too.

In another assessment it was suggested that such a student faces two reasonable choices. The first is to not include the mentor, leading to the potential of claiming research as their own and not related to an advisor. This choice was indicated to be a highly unethical choice. The second would be to include the mentor as a co-author.

What do you anticipate outcomes would be given either of these choices?

Hi Cory Jensen: Under normal conditions, this will always depend on the goodwill of the supervisor / mentor. Perhaps he or she thinks that the results are not good enough to be published under their name. In that case the student can publish the resultds on his / her own without being unethical. Of course this would cast a bad light on the supervisor. Mentioning the supervisor/ mentor as a co-author should be OK if he or she agrees to this procedure. This could even be beneficial to the career of the student. Actually, contrary to my initial judgment, I published one paper just on my own many years ago (see attachment). This is a very different case. At that time, I was an undergraduate student at the Ulrich Behrens" lab.

Since I did all the experimental work on my own, he gratefully agreed that I published this work on my own. This, however, seems to be a very rare exception.

Frank T. Edelmann , it seems clear then. If a professor would pose such a strange proposal and not acknowledge outcomes either way, something unethical is afoot. Congratulations on publishing, that is the basis for the research degree! It would be great to hear more feedback and comments from others.

Cory Jensen - This case you mentioned looks extraordinary. Why a research supervisor or mentor will ask for this? Why a supervisor who spent a year or more supervising a student, and possibly giving him/her a place in the lab to do the experiments and use the equipment, will then says to him "publish your work but do not mention my name on the paper as one of the authors"? Remember a supervisor provided the student with advice and feedback at each stage of the research, and the student name is registered in the university under the supervisor's name/lab.

Why a supervisor after all this mutual work ask not to be mentioned on a publication? May I ask what the current relationship between the student and the supervisor is? Is the student still enrolled in a course (masters or a PhD)?

This is not the real story, and something is missing in what you stated or twisted. Cory, I have another common scenario we use in teaching ethics in research; the student published a research paper without mentioning or discussing the article with the supervisor. What are the ethical and legal concerns in such a case? This is a known unethical case scenario we are aware of and has happened in several places worldwide.

Samy Azer , I think your questions are valid and are reasons for posing the question. How would you answer the questions you pose?

After studying ethics issues, I selected this question because it is a distinct and isolated situation that focuses on responsibilities of the mentee-mentor relationship in regards to publishing research.

The student was directed to publish research to continue in a research career. The student communicated as is expected/directed with/by the mentor. The mentor didn't give further direction during the publication process. However, when notified by the publisher, the mentor actually indicated not knowing of the student/efforts, leading to a mess of issues you hint at.

The extensive peripheral details of this case would make an outstanding chapter for a book. Ultimately, the student had to identify new relationships with committee members, colleagues (friends) and additional mentors to complete several publications and a dissertation.

What this situation/case illustrated to me, is the importance of research relationships and publishing responsibilities. A research student is responsible for conducting, preparing and publishing research to earn a research credential. However, the mentor relationship includes significant responsibilities and can be equally criticized. Open-transparent communication is critical. Perhaps there is far too much focus placed on having a single primary mentor. Further, if a mentor does not take these responsibilities seriously, outcomes can be severely detrimental to student(s).

In study with other students, academics, communities of practice, it was determined that there need to be timely and equitable means to correct for 'extraordinary situations' when mentors create them.

Cory Jensen - Thank you for your explanation. The idea of case discussion is essential. I use six case scenarios in my workshop Development of a Research Project. One of them I have indicated in my last message. But you are right, the supervisor could be the source of trouble, and we should highlight this as well in staff training. I think asking staff to write case scenarios about challenges or difficulties/problems that we face in research is a useful exercise. Then write them in an educational format and use them either in the chapter or in training workshops.

Best regards.

In this particular case, I believe both the researcher and his/her mentor need to communicate openly and discuss the rationale behind such inquiry! Communication is key.

In scientific ethics publication should carry the name of the Advisor/Mentor. Otherwise can happen when your Advisor does not endorse your research findings, which however very rarely happens.

Hassan Izzeddin Sarsak , I believe it is well known that communication is expected and the responsibility of both advisor/mentee, thank you for your input.

However, as Dilip Kumar Pal points out as Frank T. Edelmann indicated, not having a mentor associate with research can happen. In such a case, does the mentor still have to communicate given the 'apprentice-ship' status of a student? Surely a mentor wouldn't use non-association to place a student in a 'bad-light'.

Further, Dilip Kumar Pal , what do you mean by not endorse findings? It seems worthwhile to expand upon this point.

Dear Cory Jensen as mentioned earlier, in our discipline (synthetic inorganic chemistry) and in our country (Germany) such a constellation is highly unusual and uncommon. Research work in chemistry requires that the supervisor / mentor conceives a research project and provides laboratory space and chemicals. Why in the world should he / she refuse to publish the results together with the student? Personally I don't know of such a case.

In a rare case it happens that research results obtained by the student may not be appreciated by the advisor although the student thinks results are in order.

Frank T. Edelmann and Dilip Kumar Pal , there is a subtle distinction that is missing from publishing regardless of the mentor disposition and I challenge you both to respond.

If a student is able to publish results in a respectable publication and the mentor does clearly acknowledge that a student should publish research on their own, should fault be placed on the student for trying to publish or the mentor for not acknowledging that a student was directed to publish on their own?

Cory - Regarding your question "If a student is able to publish results in a respectable publication and the mentor does clearly acknowledge that a student should publish research on their own, should fault be placed on the student for trying to publish or the mentor for not acknowledging that a student was directed to publish on their own?" I think this is a purely fictional question. Why should a student publish his / her results on his own? In our research group this has never happened, at least not in the case of PhD students. As the supervisor / senior researcher / professor I normally conceive the research work, I supply the students with lab space and chemicals, and I supervise their work on a daily basis. So why the hell should I be left out when it comes to publishing the results? Never!

In Germany the situation is different when young researchers do their "Habilitation" or are junior professors. Then they work independently from their mentor and are expected to establish a research project of their own. Thus they are also expected to publish their results alone.

Dear Cory Jensen

You should include all contributed researchers in your research paper. this is a kind of ethics.

Frank T. Edelmann , I appreciate you engaging in this discussion. This case study was brought before an actual ethics review and deemed the student at fault. It is not a faux situation. Research ethics training indicates these types of situations need to be addressed. I think the primary point that is important for RG readers and aspiring researchers, is that doctoral students should communicate and work with mentors on/toward publication. Further, efforts to complicate this well known & expected outcome are not normal and should scrutinized. I don't know what 'Habilitation' means, is this similar to a post doc?

Abdelhameed Ibrahim , I agree. Conversation with a larger academic community indicates that ideation, writing, research and analysis are bright line indicators for authorship.

Primary advisor's name must be included in the work. There may need communication between advisor and researcher to put order of the names in the publication. Generally researcher should be the first author and advisor the second. This is normal ethics in joint research work.

Corey - The Habilitation is a tradition only in German academia. It is like a second doctorate after PhD and post doc. A researcher who wants to start an academic career in Germany does the Habilitation with a mentor. The research work for the Habilitation normally takes ca. 6 years. During this time the researcher establishes his own research project and publishes the results independently of the mentor. Often this work is financed through a scholarship. Then he / she writes a Habilitation thesis and defends it before a commission. When successful, the researcher can call himself "Privatdozent" (similar to lecturer) and can start applying for associate or full professor positions. Currently the Habilitation is more and more being replaced by the system of "junior professors".

For more information on this please see the link cited below which is entitled "German Academic Job Titles Explained"

https://academicpositions.com/career-advice/german-academic-job-titles-explained

When I was writing articles about our study (for my PhD), one of my supervisors co-authored the first article, but was then happy for me to write others as a lone author. However, when I mentioned my first study(I then did follow-ups) I tried to use 'our' or 'we' when referring to the initial piece of research, (and still do, on RG). How true this was; I would never have managed without my marvellous two supervisors!

Mary C R Wilson it seem like you had a good experience publishing your research. How do you think your experience would have been different if your mentors asked you to author research as the sole author? Would you have concerns or questions?

Cory Jensen

No, I wouldn't have minded. I felt so familiar with my findings after writing my thesis, having my viva and adding to my thesis after my viva, that I would have managed ok, I think. But it was really nice that one of my supervisors advised me about my first article. Even now, looking back to 2007, I have very positive memories when we worked together to write that first one. On my list, there were two more published earlier, but I think this was linked with the different journals rather than the date of writing.

Great question. I am thinking differently. I have seen from my 10-year experience that many mentors do not suggest or do not support/encourage their students at all. Some mentors may think it would take a lot of time for them, but mentors can benefit from their students' encouragement/support to publish at the end of the day. It can open many doors for both mentors and students: students can learn how to publish a paper, and mentors can publish their work on how their mentorship was successful or not successful.

Mary C R Wilson , I have to extend my question. What if your mentor asked to not include you as an author, then colleagues indicated that was not ethical, so if you submitted requesting clarification for authorship but instead of receiving it, your mentor tried to black list you. What would you do in this circumstance?

Sorry to push the question, but this is the intention, based on real information and the National Science Foundation's Responsible Conduct of Research training.

Ranjan Datta , thank you for your input. Based on your comment I think it is important to note that if students are seeking out a research career they should seek out mentors with the intention of publishing and make it known that they desire to publish. The actual process of publishing is a whole additional discussion. But, if students don't even know they are being guided by researchers with a disinterest in publishing their efforts are going to be greatly diminished and I am willing to assess that the potential for success will also be greatly reduced. It is my opinion that mentors taking on mentees with an interest in research should teach-mentor about the publication process in a positive fashion.

Thanks Cory Jensen for your comment. Sorry I was not clear enough on my quick message. I was referring to PhD students who are planning to build their academic path. Yes, I agree with you. Thanks

Cory Jensen

Thank you for the extension to your question. As the only study that I have taken part in with others was for my PhD, my supervisors were advising me and I was doing the practical research (semi-structured interviews) and then the analysis, although they were monitoring me with this and advising me as necessary. But as I was the one who became very familiar with the participants, both from having interviewed them, done most of the transcribing and then the analysis, I was in a much better position to be the first author. But really appreciated the co-authorship of one of my supervisors.

As it was, they were both so supportive, that I can't imagine anything like that happening. By this time, I had finished my PhD, but I think if this had happened, I would have sought advice from the university although I was not still a student, or asked the lead for research or his colleague at the NHS Trust where I was working (who were always, again, very helpful).

Now, I wonder if I could ask you what your response to blacklisting had happened to you, if it ever had, or to someone you know? Thanks, in anticipation!

If you think your advisor has contributed, then i think you should mention their name. Otherwise I dont think. Well , the contribution itself still depends on whether the goal was just to guide you or to participate in the paper.

Mary C R Wilson , thanks again for sharing your experience.

For this case study, the student had to seek out help beyond the University setting to first understand the roles and responsibilities of students and academic mentors. Slowly, persistence and communication corrected mentor errors and negative outcomes. I think some issues are still unresolved but hope to share more details in deeper case studies as part of my own academic efforts.

Mohamed Ahmed Youssef , thank you for your response. I think consensus is that an advisor (in its fulfilled sense) is listed as an author. If an advisor would like to concede entirety of authorship to a student (it could be considered an honor and I hate to acknowledge that it also could be a way to set up a student), he/she still has the responsibility to manage the situation professionally. In the later, acknowledgment would be appropriate.